WI Dunkirk not evacuated?

riggerrob · Jul 25, 2017

WI the British Army was surrounded in France and forced to surrender?
WI hardly any British soldiers escaped via Dunkirk?
How would they defend the British Isles without 400,000 soldiers and most of their modern weapons?

How would Germany treat 400,000 prisoners of war?

SsgtC · Jul 25, 2017

Actually, that number is closer to 200,000. As only 338,000 were evacuated from Dunkirk and of those, over 100,000 were French who were returned to France within weeks. Grand scheme of things, I don't think it would have had too large of an impact. Probably see less British involvement in Torch, maybe the Americans get another beach on D-Day.

weasel_airlift · Jul 25, 2017

Note that they left most of their modern weapons on the beach anyhow, so they aren't actually present in the Isles

baldipaul · Jul 25, 2017

Remember as well that the Home Army had not been deployed to France, and that would have been sufficient to throw back any invaders who somehow got past the RN and RAF.

eltf177 · Jul 25, 2017

The loss of so many trained troops will have butterfly effects in the long term. It may be that troops are not sent to Singapore just in time to be captured which might balance things out...

The Gunslinger · Jul 25, 2017

It all depends on what happens in London, if Churchill hangs on the war keeps going, albeit far more limited in offensive scope than OTL. If not, Britain pulls out and the whole world changes.

nbcman · Jul 25, 2017

There was another 190,000 soldiers of which 145,000 were British that were evacuated from Le Havre and other ports under Operations Ariel and Cycle so there were still quite a few trained troops which would be available during the coming years. If anything, there would be less troops evacuated during those operations since there probably wouldn't be any troops sent from the UK to France in the first couple of weeks of June as opposed to the 2+ British / Canadian divisions which were sent and then evacuated.

fastmongrel · Jul 26, 2017

I dont think the loss of 230,000 men would mean a smaller army but I could see earlier labour shortages as more men are called up.

Carl Schwamberger · Jul 26, 2017

Another alternative for soldiers is shifting a proportionate number of Commonwealth or empire pool of undertrained & equipped units to the group of properly trained & equipped formations. Scaring up another 150,000 or 200,000 suitable line ranks should not be a long term problem. A adjustment in officer training would be needed & it's going to screw with the advancement of a few dozen general officers.